Anti-patent campaigners are opposing against the Draft European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA) because of they fear that it might effectively strengthen patent protection in Europe. They, in contrast, are eager to weaken the patent system wherever they find an opportunity. Now, the lastest plot so far has been published by Mr. Florian Müller:
"[...] The Commission's legal services say that the EPLA interacts with parts of the acquis communautaire (the totality of existing EU law), in particular Regulation 44/2001 ('Brussels I Regulation' on jurisdiction) and Directive 2004/48 (intellectual property rights enforcement). There is a rule in the EU that if a certain field of law has already been regulated by the EU, the EU member states must not enter independently intointernational treaties that affect the same law because conflicts might arise sooner or later.
The Commission's position is shared by, among others, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, an influential conservative MEP (Member of the European Parliament), but not by the proponents of the EPLA. A number of them, including the Brussels-based lobbying organization EICTA, claim that the EPLA is perfectly in line with the acquis communautaire. And they stress that negotiations on the EPLA began years before the two aforementioned pieces of EU law took effect, claiming that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has previously allowed EU member states to move forward on their own with an international treaty because the beginning of negotiations predated the affected parts of the acquis communautaire. There are some other theories as well.
The motivation on the part of the pro-EPLA movement is obvious: They want the EPLA to be ratified, and it's easier for them to get a number of countries (possibly even just two, such as Germany and another one) to do so directly. As soon as the EU is involved, certain decisions have to be taken at the EU level. And for decisions in the EU, you either need (depending on the type of decision) unanimity in the EU Council (i.e., the votes of all member states, which means that presently 1 out of 25 countries could block the decision) or a qualified majority (much more than 50% of the votes) in the Council plus the support of the European Parliament. The software patent directive failed because of the latter requirement: the EP voted it down. [...]"
In short: Feed the EPLA project into the ratification mills of the EU and hope that the entire matter is watered down or even stalled forever. I haven't yet made up my mind as to whether or not this plot would acutally work under the framework of EU/EG law.
European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA) because of they fear that it might effectively strengthen patent protection in Europe. They, in contrast, are eager to weaken the patent system wherever they find an opportunity. Now, the lastest plot so far has been 